Innovation Policy Post

After the encouraging opinion of Advocate General Cruz Villalón in the Scarlet vs SABAM case delivered in April 2011, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) gave its final judgment on 24 November. One can say that the judgment is crucial for the Internet economy in general and for Internet Service Providers (ISPs) in particular, in two important ways. First, it clarifies and strengthens the ‘no general obligation to monitor’ provision enshrined in the e-Commerce Directive and, second, it makes clear that filtering measures raise concerns under a couple of fundamental rights, which have to be reconciled as much as possible. But let’s first turn to the facts of the case.

A week after the U.S. Congress considered repealing its open Internet rules, the European Parliament stressed the importance of a neutral and open Internet at its November plenary session.To this end, it adopted a non-legislative Resolution “on the open internet and net neutrality in Europe,” which calls on the Commission to ensure a uniform enforcement of the existing regulatory framework for communications and to enhance transparency in current traffic management practices. 

What do the MPAA, the RIAA, the U.S. Congress, and the perennially human-rights-challenged Thai government have in common?  A similar taste in misguided regulations with draconian flair.